Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on

Should Women Cover Their Heads in Church?

Now be of good cheer. This blog post is meant to be a light-hearted discussion of this matter. The bottom line is that the Church currently has NO rule on this matter and women are entirely free to wear a veil or a hat in Church or not.

I thought I’d blog on this since it came up in the comments yesterday and it occurred to me that it might provoke an interesting discussion. But again this is not meant to be a directive discussion about what should be done. Rather an informative discussion about the meaning of head coverings for women in the past and how such customs might be interpreted now. We are not in the realm of liturgical law here just preference and custom.

What I’d like to do is to try and understand the meaning and purpose of a custom that, up until rather recently was quite widespread in the Western Church.

With the more frequent celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass, the use of the veil is also becoming more common. But even at the Latin Masses I celebrate, women exhibit diversity in this matter. Some wear the longer veil (mantilla) others a short veil. Others  wear hats. Still others wear no head covering at all.

History – the wearing of a veil or hat for women seems to have been a fairly consistent practice in the Church in the West until fairly recently. Practices in the Eastern and Orthodox Churches have varied. Protestant denominations also show a wide diversity in this matter. The 1917 Code of Canon Law in  the Catholic Church mandated that women wear a veil or head covering. Prior to 1917 there was no universal Law but it was customary in most places for women to wear some sort of head covering. The 1983 Code of Canon Law made no mention of this requirement and by the 1980s most women, at least here in America, had ceased to wear veils or hats anyway. Currently there is no binding rule and the custom in most places is no head covering at all.

Scripture – In Biblical Times women generally wore veils in any public setting and this would include the Synagogue. The clearest New Testament reference to women veiling or covering their head is from St. Paul:

But I want you to know that Christ is the head of every man, and a husband the head of his wife, and God the head of Christ. Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head.  But any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved.  For if a woman does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off. But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should wear a veil.  A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; nor was man created for woman, but woman for man;  for this reason a woman should have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels. Woman is not independent of man or man of woman in the Lord. For just as woman came from man, so man is born of woman; but all things are from God.  Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head unveiled? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears his hair long it is a disgrace to him, whereas if a woman has long hair it is her glory, because long hair has been given (her) for a covering? But if anyone is inclined to be argumentative, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God. (1 Cor 11:1-11)

This is clearly a complicated passage and has some unusual references. Paul seems to set forth four arguments as to why a woman should wear a veil.

1. Argument 1 – Paul clearly sees the veil a woman wears as a sign of her submission to her husband. He also seems to link it to modesty since his references to a woman’s  hair cut short were references to the way prostitutes wore their hair and his reference to a shaved head was the punishment due an adultress. No matter how you look at it such arguments aren’t going to encourage a lot of women to wear a veil today. It is a true fact that the Scriptures consistently teach that a wife is to be submitted to her husband. I cannot and will not deny what God’s word says even though it is unpopular. However I will say that the same texts that tell a woman to be submitted tell the husband to have a great and abiding love for his wife. I have blogged on this “difficult” teaching on marriage elsewhere and would encourage you to read that blog post if you’re troubled or bothered by the submission texts. It is here: An Unpopular Teaching on Marriage. That said, it hardly seems that women would rush today to wear veils to emphasize their submission to their husband.

2. Argument 2 – Regarding the Angels– Paul also sees a reason for women to wear veils “because of the angels.” This is a difficult reference  to understand. There are numerous explanations I have read over the years. One of the less convincing ones is that the angels are somehow distracted by a woman’s beauty. Now the clergy might be 🙂 but it just doesn’t seem likely to me that the angels would have this problem. I think the more convincing argument is that St. Paul has Isaiah in mind who wrote: I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft.(Is 6:2-3). Hence the idea seems to be that since the angels veil their faces (heads) it is fitting for women to do the same. But then the question, why not a man too? And here also Paul supplies an aswer that is “difficult” for modern ears: A man, on the other hand, should not cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man. In other words a man shares God’s glory immediately whereas a woman does as well but derivatively for she was formed from Adam’s wounded side. Alas this argument too will not likely cause a run on veil sales.

3. Argument 3 – The argument from “nature” – In effect Paul argues that since nature itself veils a woman with long hair and this is her glory that this also argues for her covering her head in Church. What is not clear is that, if nature has already provided this covering, why then should she cover her covering? I want to take up this notion of glory in my conclusion.

4. Argument 4-  The Argument from Custom–  This argument is pretty straight-forward: Paul says it is customary for a woman to cover her head when praying and, other things being equal, this custom should be followed. Paul goes on to assert that those who insist on doing differently are being “argumentative.” In effect he argues that for the sake of good order and to avoid controversy the custom should be followed. However, in calling it a custom, the text also seems to allow for a time like ours where the custom is different. Customs have stability but are not usually forever fixed. Hence, though some argue that wearing veils is a scriptural norm that women “must” follow today, the use of the word custom seems to permit of the possibility that it is not an unvarying norm we are dealing with here. Rather, it is a custom from that time that does not necessarily bind us today. This of course seems to be how the Church understands this text for she does not require head coverings for her daughters.

Conclusions –

1. That women are not required to wear veils today is clear in terms of Church Law. The argument that the Church is remiss in not requiring this of her daughters is hard to sustain when scriptures attach the word “custom” to the practice.

2. I will say however that I like veils and miss women wearing them. When I was a boy in the 1960s my mother and sister always wore their veils and so did all women in those days and I remember how modestly beautiful I found them to be. When I see women wear them today I have the same impression.

3. That said, a woman does not go to Church to please or impress me.

4. It is worth noting that a man is still forbidden to wear a hat in Church. If I see it I go to him and ask him to remove it. There  a partial exception to the clergy who are permitted to wear birettas and to bishops who are to wear the miter. However, there are strict rules in this regard that any head cover is to be removed when they go to the altar. Hence,  for men,  the rule, or shall we say the custom, has not changed.

5. Argument 5 – The Argument from Humility – This leads me then to a possible understanding of the wearing of the veil for women and the uncovered head for the men that may be more useful to our times. Let’s call it The Argument from Humility.

For both men and women, humility before God is the real point of these customs. In the ancient world as now, women gloried in their hair and often gave great attention to it. St. Paul above,  speaks of a woman’s hair as her glory. As a man I am not unappreciative of this glory. Women do wonderful things with their hair. As such their hair is part of their glory and, as St. Paul says it seems to suggest above  it is appropriate to cover our glory before the presence of God.

As for men, in the ancient world and to some lesser extent now, hats often signified rank and membership. As such men displayed their rank and membership in organizations with pride in the hats they wore. Hence Paul tells them to uncover their heads and leave their worldly glories aside when coming before God. Today men still do  some of this (esp. in the military) but men wear less hats in general. But when they do they are often boasting of allegiances to sports teams and the like. Likewise, some men who belong to fraternal organizations such as the various Catholic Knights groups often  display ranks on their hats. We clergy do this as well to some extent with different color poms on birettas etc. Paul encourages all this to be left aside in Church. As for the clergy, though we may enter the Church with these ranked hats and insignia, we are to cast them aside when we go to the altar. Knights organizations are also directed  to set down their hats when the Eucharistic prayer begins.

I do not advance this argument from humility to say women ought to cover their heads, for I would not require what the Church does not. But I offer the line of reasoning as a way to understand veiling in a way that is respectful of the modern setting, IF  a woman chooses to use the veil. Since this is just a matter of custom then we are not necessarily required to understand its meaning in exactly the way St. Paul describes. Submission is biblical but it need not be the reason for the veil. Humility before God seems a more workable understanding especially since it can be seen to apply to both men and women in the way I have tried to set it forth.

There are an amazing number of styles when it comes to veils and mantillas: Mantillas online

This video gives some other reasons why a woman might wear a veil. I think it does a pretty good job of showing some of the traditions down through the centuries. However I think the video strays from what I have presented here in that it seems to indicate that women ought to wear the veil and that it is a matter of obedience. I do not think that is what the Church teaches in this regard. There can be many good reasons to wear the veil but I don’t think we can argue that obedience to a requirement is one of them.

Posted on

The Whole Counsel of God

There is a wonderful passage from the Acts of Apostles in today’s Mass and it comprises a sermon from an early Bishop (St. Paul) to the priests of the early Church.

Paul’s Farewell Sermon – The scene is Miletus, a town in Asia Minor on the coast not far from Ephesus. Paul, who is about to depart for Jerusalem summons the presbyters (priests) of the early Church at Ephesus. Paul has ministered there for three years and now summons the priests for this final exhortation. In the sermon, St. Paul cites his own example of having been a zealous teacher of the faith who did not fail to preach the “whole counsel of God.” He did not merely preach what suited him or made him popular. He preached it all. To these early priests Paul leaves this legacy and would have them follow in his footsteps. Let’s look at excerpts from this final exhortation. First the text them some commentary:

From Miletus Paul had the presbyters  of the Church at Ephesus summoned. When they came to him, he addressed them, “You know how I lived among you the whole time from the day I first came to the province of Asia. I served the Lord with all humility and with the tears and trials that came to me…., and I did not at all shrink from telling you what was for your benefit, or from teaching you in public or in your homes. I earnestly bore witness for both Jews and Greeks to repentance before God and to faith in our Lord Jesus…..But now, compelled by the Spirit, I am going to Jerusalem……“But now I know that none of you to whom I preached the kingdom during my travels will ever see my face again. And so I solemnly declare to you this day that I am not responsible for the blood of any of you, for I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God….. (Acts 20:1-38 selected)

Here then is the prescription for every Bishop, every priest and deacon, every catechist, parent and Catholic: that we should preach the whole counsel (the entire plan of God). It is too easy for us to emphasize only that which pleases us or makes sense to us or fits in our worldview. There are some who love the Lord’s sermons on love but cannot abide  his teachings on death, judgment, heaven and hell. Some love to discuss liturgy and ceremony but the care of the poor is far from them. Others point to His compassion but neglect his call to repentance. Some love the way he dispatches the Pharisees and other leaders of the day but become suddenly deaf when the Lord warns against fornication or insists that we love our neighbor, enemy and spouse. Some love to focus inwardly and debate over doctrine but the outward focus of true evangelization to which we are commanded (cf Mat 28:19) is neglected.

In the Church as a whole we too easily divide out rather predictably along certain lines and emphases. Life issues here, social justice over there. Strong moral preaching over here, compassionate inclusiveness over there. When one side speaks the other side says, “There they go again.”

And yet somewhere we must be able to say with St. Paul that we did not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. While this is especially incumbent on the clergy it must also be true for parents and all who attain to any leadership in the Church. All of the issues above are important and must have their proper place in the preaching and witness of every Catholic, clergy and lay. While we may have gifts to work in certain areas we should learn to appreciate the whole counsel and the fact that others in the Church may be needed to balance and complete our work. It is true we must exclude notions that stray from revealed doctrine, but within doctrine’s protective walls it is necessary that we not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God.

And if we do this we will suffer. Paul speaks above of tears and trials. In preaching the whole counsel of God, (not just favorite passages and politically correct themes), expect to suffer. Expect to not quite fit in with people’s expectations. Jesus got into trouble with just about everyone. He didn’t just offend the elite and powerful. Even his own disciples puzzled over his teachings on divorce saying “If that is the case of man not being able to divorce his wife it is better never to marry!” (Matt 19). Regarding the Eucharist, many left him and would no longer walk in his company (John 6). In speaking of his divine origins many took up stones to stone him but he passed through their midst (Jn 8).  In addition he spoke of taking up crosses, forgiving your enemy and preferring nothing to him. He forbade even lustful thoughts let alone fornication, and insisted we must learn to curb our unrighteous anger. Preaching the whole counsel of God is guaranteed to earn us the wrath of many.

As a priest I have sadly had to bid farewell to congregations and this is a critical passage whereby I examine my ministry. Did I preach even the difficult stuff? Was I willing to suffer for the truth? Did my people hear from me the whole counsel of God or just the safe stuff?

How about you? Have you proclaimed the whole counsel of God? If you are clergy when you move on…..if you are a parent when your child leaves for college…..if you are a Catechist when the children are ready to be confirmed or have reached college age…..If you teach in RCIA and the time comes for sacraments……Can you say you preached it all? God warned Ezekiel that if he failed to warn the sinner, that sinner would surely die for his sins but that Ezekiel himself would be responsible for his death, (Ez 3:17ff). Paul is able to say he is not responsible for the death (the blood) of any of them for he did not shrink from proclaiming the whole counsel of God. How about us?

The whole counsel of God.

This video contains the warning to the watchmen (us) in Ezekiel 3. Watch it if you dare.

Posted on

On Fascinosum et Tremendum

You may say, “This title is Greek to me.”  Actually it is a Latin and it refers to an important balance in our spiritual life. It is phrase that speaks of  trembling  before the Holy that draws me close.

Fascinosum is where we get the word fascinating. It refers to something that calls to me, draws me, peaks my interest, something that strongly attracts.

Tremendum is where we get the word tremendous. It refers to something awesome. Something too big to comprehend or grasp. Hence we draw back in a kind of reverential fear mixed with a kind of bewilderment. And we feel small before the tremendous.

Many ancient authors used these words to describe the human person before God: drawn by God’s inexorable beauty yet compelled to fall prostrate before His awesome majesty. Scripture speaks of this experience in many places. Here are but a few:

  1. I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft. “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts!” they cried one to the other. “All the earth is filled with his glory!” At the sound of that cry, the frame of the door shook and the house was filled with smoke. Then I said, “Woe is me, I am doomed! For I am a man of unclean lips, living among a people of unclean lips; yet my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!” Then one of the Seraphim flew to me, holding an ember which he had taken with tongs from the altar.  He touched my mouth with it. “See,” he said, “now that this has touched your lips, your wickedness is removed, your sin purged.” (Isaiah 6:1-5)
  2. And Jesus was transfigured before them; his face shone like the sun and his clothes became white as light. And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, conversing with him. Then Peter said to Jesus in reply, “Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.” While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud cast a shadow over them,  then from the cloud came a voice that said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.”   When the disciples heard this, they fell prostrate and were very much afraid. But Jesus came and touched them, saying, “Rise, and do not be afraid.” (Matt 17:1-6)
  3. I [John] saw seven gold lampstands and in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man,  wearing an ankle-length robe, with a gold sash around his chest. The hair of his head was as white as white wool or as snow,  and his eyes were like a fiery flame.  His feet were like polished brass refined in a furnace,  and his voice was like the sound of rushing water.  In his right hand he held seven stars. A sharp two-edged sword came out of his mouth, and his face shone like the sun at its brightest. When I caught sight of him, I fell down at his feet as though dead. He touched me with his right hand and said, “Do not be afraid. I am the first and the last, the one who lives. (Rev 1:15-17)

Note the pattern of these theophanies: They are drawn by God and behold his beauty (fascinosum), they instinctively fall prostrate and need to be reassured by God (tremendum). It is an awesome thing to fall into the hands of a living God! (Heb 10:31). The most interesting passage to me is the third one involving John the Beloved. This is the same John who, at the Last Supper, was perfectly capable of leaning back on the Lord’s shoulder to ask him a question. Yet now, as he beholds the full glory of Christ in the heavenly realm, he falls to his face. The Lord’s glory is fully unveiled here and John, who appreciates the beauty and describes it to us is ultimately compelled to fall down.

We have come through an era that has trivialized God in many ways. Perhaps it was an over correction to a more severe time of the 1950s when any misstep of ours could result in a quick trip to hell if we didn’t get to confession immediately. Mortal sin was understood only objectively by many in those days and by God, even if there were two feet of snow on the ground and you missed Church, your were in sin and had to get to confession asap. Fear was a strong motivator for many in those days.

But we over corrected and by the 1970s the usual notion was that God didn’t seem to care what we did. He was rendered quite harmless actually and it seemed that his main purpose was to affirm us. As for Jesus, gone was the unrelenting and uncompromising prophet of the Scriptures, only to replaced by a kind of “Mr Rogers,” or  “Buddy Jesus” version who just went about blessing the poor, healing the sick and asking us to love each other. The Jesus who cleansed the Temple, rebuked unbelief, demanded first place in our life, insisted on the cross, warned of coming judgement and hell, and spoke with such authority that even the guards sent to arrest him came back empty handed saying “no one has ever spoken like that man”, this Jesus was no where to be found by the 1970s

And thus we have needed a return to the balance that fascinosum et tremendum offers. Surely we sense a deep desire for God, we are drawn to him in all his beauty and glory. But we are encountering God here and we are but creatures. A reverential fear is appropriate for the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It may well be that God will reassure us, but our instinct to tremendum is a proper and biblical one. The Biblical saints knew both fascinosum and tremendum and they show us what a true encounter with God includes.

This does not mean that our liturgies need be somber,  for reverence and joy can occupy the same heart. But in the end, it is God whom we worship and falling to our knees is wholly appropriate. Seeking the necessary purification and striving for the holiness without which no one will see God (Heb 12:14) is appropriate. I wish you plenty of fascinosum and equal doses of tremendum!

Posted on

Eternity is Not A Long Time, it is All Time.

In yesterday’s blog (I Don’t See Ghosts. But God Does) I mentioned eternity and that it was the fullness of time wherein the past present and future were all at once for God. God does not have to wait for things to happen nor does he have to reminisce about the past. It is all before him as one moment.

I would like to say a little more about this. First, I would like to attempt to better define eternity. And then I’d like to ponder some possible implications and see what you think.

“Defining” The Mystery of Eternity  – I have put the word “defining” in quotes purposefully since,  simply defining eternity is quite impossible. By analogy, what if I were to ask you to “Define the universe and give three examples.”  Such a request would be silly since the universe cannot simply be defined. It is just too big to be contained by words. And so it is with eternity. Ultimately eternity is a mystery in that,  whatever we  can say about it, more remains un-sayable. So, in proposing to “define” eternity I am not arrogantly thinking I can contain the concept in the mere confines of words. But since we need some parameters for our discussion, some definitions, (parameters) really are needed.

What Do we mean by Eternity?  Most people misunderstand the word eternity simply to mean “a long, long, time.”  But that is not what is meant by the word. When the Greeks coined the word eternity, (Aeon) they meant by it “the fullness of time.”   That is to say, Eternity is the past, present and future all being experienced at once.

I cannot tell you what this is like, but I can illustrate it. Look at the clock to the upper right. The time is 1:15 in the afternoon. That means that 10:00 AM is in the past and 6:00 PM is in the future. But consider the dot at the center of the clock and see that, at that spot,  10 AM, 1:15 PM, and 6 PM are all the same, they are equally present to the dot in the center. In fact every possible time that can be registered on the outer edges of the clock is equally present to the center dot. At the center dot there is no substantial difference to any outer edge time indication. There is no future, no past, all is present, all is equally accessible to the center dot. This is eternity and this is where God lives.

God Lives in eternity – We live our life in serial time, on the outer edge of the clock. But God does not. God lives in eternity. God lives in the fullness of time. For God, past, and future are the same as the present. God is not “waiting” for things to happen. All things just are. God is not waiting and wondering if you or I will get to heaven. He is not watching history unfold like a movie. In eternity, 10,000 years ago is just as present as 10,000 years from now. Eternity includes all pasts and futures in the living present.

[If you wish to read more on this you might read Peter Kreeft’s Book Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Heaven (esp. pp. 151-171)].

Scripture hints at God’s eternity in numerous passages. For example,

  1. But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like one day. (2 Peter 3:8).
  2. Psalm 139 says, Your eyes foresaw my actions; in your book all are written down; my days were shaped, before one came to be. (Ps 139, 15).
  3. Psalm 90 says, For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night. (Ps 90:4).
  4. And then there is simply the God’s name: “I AM” In this Name, there is no past, no future, just an eternal now, the present tense.
  5. Jesus declared to the crowds, “Before Abraham ever was, I AM.” (John 8:58).

So here is the most awesome mystery of time, the fullness of time, eternity. Some implications from this are interesting to ponder.

1. God is not waiting for anything. He did not wait for you or me to be born, he is not waiting for us to die. He is not waiting to judge us. He is not waiting for us to enter heaven (or Hell!). He is not waiting for us to emerge from purgatory. He is not waiting for the end of the world. Everything is accomplished. Everything is done. And yet every thing is also underway. The day of my birth is present to God. They day of my death is present to him. The full sweep of history is before God in one glance, one comprehensive NOW. We may say, “Why is God taking so long to answer my prayer?” The fact is he has already provided. The Lord answers prayers, sooner than right now, faster than immediately.

2. This does not mean that everything is predetermined in such a way as to make our freedom meaningless. That God already knows and and has always known every decision we make does not mean that we do not in fact freely make it. God’s knowledge does not cancel our freedom.

3. At some point we will move to the eternal center with God. It does not seem likely that we will ever comprehend time and things as comprehensively as God. And yet the fact that we move to eternity, to the fullness of time, would suggest that the whole course of our life will somehow, mysteriously be present to us. I say “suggest,”  since none of this is perfectly laid out for us to know here. This is speculation based on what eternity seems to be. Since, by definition the past will be present, some how it would seem that the whole of our past life will be present and available to us in heaven. Somehow my high school graduation, my first date 🙂 , my ordination, even this typing session will be present. How and it what manner or mode it is experienced is not clear. Sometimes people ask if their pets will be in heaven. If the past is accessible it would seem that pets somehow are with us there. How and to what degree we would want to go back and “visit” the past is not possible to say. Saying what eternity seems to include is one thing, describing how it is experienced there is something altogether different and beyond the realm of what we can likely know here.

4. Why bother praying? Some my say if everything already is, what difference does prayer make? But this question presumes that God has not always known you would pray and already set forth the answer based on that. For us, time and decisions must unfold. Though God has always known what we would do or not do, we are NOT in that position and thus must decide to pray. That God has always known what we would do is beside the point from our perspective. We must decide to pray and know that God has always known if we would pray and had already acted accordingly.

5.  Are the Souls in heaven waiting for anything?  – If eternity is the fullness of time and if past and future are contained in a perfect now it would seem they are not waiting. My parents, who have both died are not likely waiting for me to join them since the future is already present to them. They are not waiting for their bodies to rise for in eternity that is accomplished. From our perspective these things are not accomplished and must unfold, but in eternity it would seem that they are already present. Or so it would seem.

Please note  that I offer these implications (speculations really) very humbly. Note how often I have used the word “seem.” That is intentional. Eternity is a very deep mystery. We can define it (sort of) but grasping how it is experienced is quite another matter. I’d like to know what you think. Analogies are always appreciated and large doses of humility are necessary. We must remember that we are talking about something we have never experienced. Further we are using mere words to describe what cannot really be reduced to words. Words are necessary, but remember, they are inadequate.

This song says, “God don’t ever change.”

Posted on

I Don’t See Ghosts But God Does.

The Parish where I serve has a history stretching back to 1893. Though our current buildings reach back only to 1938, even that is a stretch of over 70 years. As I walk these buildings, especially in the quiet of the night I sense a connection. I surely have never seen a ghost but in my mind’s eye I sense those who once walked the aisles of my Church, who sat in the pews. I ponder the many, many baptisms, at our font. The thousands of brides who walked our beautiful aisle. The thousands of first communions, confirmations, the thump as penitents knelt in the confessionals still in use after all these years. And yes, the many funerals.

How many times have those venerable old doors opened to admit a soul loved by God? How many tens of thousands, maybe over a hundred thousand have cumulatively prayed in my parish.

Late at night, I often visit the Church which is connected to the rectory, and I can almost see them. Perhaps too a faint echo of organ or choral music from the deep past echoing faintly in the shadows of the hallowed hall we call our Church.

In the rectory too, I wonder at the many dozens of priests who once occupied my room, who once sat at my dining room table. Most of them long dead, some still living. At times I sense their presence. I remember one priest who is dead now. Some years ago in the early 1990s when I was assigned here for the first time I occupied the rooms he once did. I felt a strong mandate from the Holy Spirit to pray for him. He was quite old but still living at the time and had left in 1970s for a schismatic church. Three years ago he died. Recently a brother priest told he that he had reconciled him to the Church just weeks before he died. Praise God. And now here I am again, back living in the same pastor’s quarters he once lived in. I feel a connection to him and the other priests who once walked these halls and lived in these rooms.

Somehow the past reaches forward and touches me and I know it is real. For the past is just as present to God as the present moment is and every future moment. It’s all knit together by God who is eternal. For eternal means the fullness of time. It  means that the past, present and future are all the same to God, each equally present to him. So in God all those church events of the past are just as present to him as I am now. And tomorrow’s sermons is already accomplished for God as are all my sermons and Masses. And every priest who will one day come after me,  and all that they will do,  is already present to God. It’s all equally present to Him.

I don’t see Ghosts, but God does. And they are just as present and real to him as I am. And God sees those who will come after me too. The great mystery of time and God’s eternity unfold in these hallowed halls and in yours too.

The picture at the upper right is my parish in 1956.

This video is an unusual one. It depicts three priests singing of the history of a parish. And as they sing that history becomes present. There are men and women depicted going back to the 16th century. Sacraments are celebrated, people pray, and light candles. And gradually the people look more and more modern and then are of the present. Every parish holds the past as well as the present. For since God is present, so is the past, and so is the future.

Posted on

Truth in the New Translation Series #3: The Communicantes of the Roman Canon

In this series we are looking at the new Translation of the Roman Missal and how it restores to us a clearer articulation of the beautiful truth contained in the Latin text. Many of these truths have been lost or ambiguously presented in the current rendering we are using. Lex orandi, Lex credendi  (the law of praying is the law of believing). Hence the new translation, since it is more accurate and literal,  gives us a chance to more clearly appreciate anew the beauty of our faith based on what we pray. The previous installments in this series can be found here:

Truth in Translation Series

As usual, the Latin text is presented, followed by the new translation, and then by the rendering currently in use.

LATIN: Communicantes, et memoriam venerantes, in primis gloriosae semper Virginis Mariae, Genetricis Dei et Domini nostri Iesu Christi: sed et beati Ioseph, eiusdem Virginis Sponsi, et beatorum Apostolorum ac Martyrum tuorum, Petri et Pauli, Andreae, (Iacobi, Ioannis, Thomae, Iacobi, Philippi, Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simonis et Thaddaei: Lini, Cleti, Clementis, Xysti, Cornelii, Cypriani, Laurentii, Chrysogoni, Ionnis et Pauli, Cosmae et Damiani) et omnium Sanctorum tuorum; quorum meritis precibusque concedas, ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur auxilio. (Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Amen.

NEW TRANSLATION: In communion with those whose memory we venerate, especially the glorious ever-Virgin Mary, Mother of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ, † and blessedJoseph, Spouse of the same Virgin, your blessed Apostles and Martyrs, Peter and Paul, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude: Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian] and all your Saints: through their merits and prayers, grant that in all things we may be defended by your protecting help. [Through Christ our Lord. Amen.]

RENDERING IN CURRENT USE: In union with the whole Church we honor Mary, the ever-virgin mother of Jesus Christ our Lord and God. We honor Joseph, her husband, the apostles and martyrs Peter and Paul, Andrew, (James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude; we honor Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian) and all the saints. May their merits and prayers grant us your constant help and protection. (Through Christ our Lord. Amen.)

1. The Communion of the Saints– It has been a long and ancient tradition to refer to our relationship with the saints as the “communion of the Saints”. The current rendering fails to use the word communion, but only union and  adds the phrase “the whole Church.” It is not wrong to say that we have a communion with the whole Church if we hold the faith and are in a state of grace. However, noble though this idea is, it is not what the Latin says. The Latin text literally says, “In communion (with) and venerating the memory of…..” and then goes on to list the saints. Hence what we have described here is the communion of the Saints and the fact that we venerate their memory and are swept up into the communion of the Saints. This communion is described as a kind of hierarchy beginning with Mary (see just below) and then Joseph. Then the apostles and then the martyrs. The prayer goes on to mention all the apostles by name along with some of the early martyrs. The prayer will conclude by asking the Lord’s protection on account of their prayers. The new translation thus restores to us, by a more literal rendering, a more proper understanding of the communion of the saints to which the prayer refers.

2. The glories of Mary re-articulated– The current version we are using rather flatly says, “We honor Mary, the ever virgin Mother…..” But the Latin (and the newer and more accurate Translation) speak of her more effusively, indicating that we venerate the memory “especially, the glorious ever-virgin Mary.” Note that Latin says we honor her  “in primis” (in the first place). The New English captures this reasonably by saying “especially.”  The Latin calls her glorious, as does the new translation. Why all this? Mary is not just any saint. She is the Queen of all the saints. She is Queen Mother of the Church. She is “our tainted nature’s solitary boast.”  She is God’s masterpiece. She is the new Eve. She has pride of place in any listing of the saints. Many Old Testament texts have been taken by the Church and applied to Mary down through the Centuries. For example: You are the glory of Jerusalem, you are the Joy of Israel, you are the highest honor of our people. (Judith 15:7). I am the rose of Sharon, I am the lily of the valleys (Song 2:1). Your name will be renowned through all generations; thus nations shall praise you forever (Ps 45:18). Blessed are you, daughter; by the Most High God, above all the women on earth. (Judith 13:18) . The trust you have shown shall not pass from the memories of men, but shall ever remind them of the power of God. (Judith 13:25). Well, you get the point. Mary is honored in the first place and is the glorious ever-Virgin Mary, Mother of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ. The new translation, by accurately reporting the Latin restores her glories and pre-eminence among the saints.

3. Clarity about Joseph– The reference to Joseph in the Roman Canon is relatively new. It was added in 1962 by Pope John XXIII. The exact Latin phrase that was added was sed et beati Ioseph, eiusdem Virginis Sponsi (and of Blessed Joseph, the spouse of the same Virgin). The wording was chosen very carefully to reflect the fact that he was her husband to be sure, but she was the same Virgin who was just called “ever-virgin” in the previous phrase. It is a way of re-emphasizing Mary’s Virginity which is necessary today in an age where many, even in the Church have wanted to doubt it. The current version lost this nuance when it simply said, “Joseph her husband.” The new translation restores the emphasis by translating it: “blessed Joseph, Spouse of the same Virgin. ” Note too that Joseph gets his adjective back: “Blessed.” The current version so often just eliminated words without apparent reason. Why not call him blessed as the Latin does? It was puzzling. But thankfully the new translation will have us giving Joseph his due.

4. Blessed apostles and martyrs– The same may be said for the apostles and martyrs whom the Latin calls “blessed.” The current version eliminated the word. Why again is a mystery. But the new translation will once again let us give them their due. They are blessed indeed.

5. They Are God’s Holy Ones –  Perhaps I am being picky but the current version says, “and all the saints” but the Latin says, “and all YOUR saints.” They are God’s saints after all, his holy ones. The New Translation gets this right as well.

This is a video I put together some time ago in honor of the Blessed Mother, she who is our tainted nature’s solitary boast:

Posted on

The Problem of Privacy: God is Watching….And So Are Many Others!

At the bottom of this post is a remarkable video from CBS news that indicates that if you have or use a digital copier, everything you have copied on it going back years is stored on a hard drive in the copier. The drive is evidently so large in them that they can store over 20,000 documents and hundreds of thousands of pages. Hence if you have ever photocopied personal materials containing social security numbers, checking info, personal data, etc, it is on that hard drive. The CBS news crew showed how easy it is to remove the hard drive and download its contents. It’s a stunning little segment and I recommend you watch it and share it with 500 of your closest friends.

Now I have titled this blog post the “Problem of Privacy”  and I mean it in two senses.

The first is the usual sense that many of us are experiencing something of an erosion in the privacy we have come to expect. Our data is out there in cyberspace and can too easily be intercepted by the nosey and the criminal. GPS devices help track our whereabouts, Internet browsing habits are retained at search engines, “cookies” in our computer also track our habits.  YouTube faithfully records our viewing habits and do our cable boxes. And,  as you can see in the video below,  just about everything we have ever copied on any copier built after 2002 in dutifully recorded and kept. Why I am not sure, but it’s there for the viewing. In many ways our life is an open book. In some ways having our info out there is a convenience. In other ways we are alarmed and suspicious. But in this sense privacy has become a problem. There is less and less of it each day. And look out, those full body scanners on the way at airports.

There is a second sense however in which I use the the phrase the “Problem of Privacy.” In a very important way we must remember that there has never been anything private about our life to God. He sees everything. He is the searcher of minds and hearts. The Book of Hebrews says that to him everything lies naked and exposed (Heb 4:13). No thought, deliberation or action of ours is hidden from God.

One of the problems of the modern age is that we are too easily forgetful of the fact that God witnesses everything we do. In school settings I have often reminded students pretending they had done nothing wrong: “Now be careful! God is watching and he knows everything you do. He also knows if you are lying to me! You might get away with something with me but you won’t avoid God!” But it is not only children who need to be reminded of this. God sees and knows everything we think and do. In this sense there is no privacy. God is watching. Deep down we know but our weak minds forget. And when we do remember our crafty minds try to reinvent God by saying dumb things like, “God doesn’t  mind” or “God understands”  or “God will not punish.”

So, absolute privacy is an illusion. We may well be able to carve out some privacy from one another and well we should. But we should not seek privacy from God nor can we. There is something increasingly medicinal about practicing the presence of God. The more we experience that God is present and watching the more we accept him on his own terms and do not try to reinvent him, them more we do this the more our behavior can be reformed. A little salutary fear can be medicinal while we wait for the more perfect motive of love to drive out sin.

And, frankly too, acknowledging that not only is God watching but others are too can also have some good effects. We may not approve of  their ability to see us, but in the end it can help to remember that they do. A few examples might help illustrate what I mean.

  1. Internet Porn – As a confessor the sin of Internet pornography has increasingly found its way into the confessions I hear. One of the things I try to remind penitents of is the fact that when they are on the Internet they are out in public with a name tag on. All their browsing habits are stored both on their own computers and out at the sites they visit and the  browsing engines they use. If they think they are  merely in the privacy of their own room they ought to think again. Personally, this knowledge keeps me far away from bad sites of any kind on the Internet. There is a kind of salutary fear in knowing that I am out in public when on-line. The same is true for cable TV. Those boxes send data  about what I watch and how long,  back to the Cable company. My browsing and viewing habits are known to those who might wish to find them. Frankly it keeps me out of trouble. I hope other virtues do as well, but remembering that I am in public is very helpful.
  2. The same is true for e-mail and other forms of Internet communication such as face book and blogging. Once you press send, or publish, you’ve just made history. The contents of what you have said are out there to stay. You may delete it, but it will stay as data on servers for as long as the sun shall shine. Be very careful what you say for no matter how private you may think it is, it is not. You are always in earshot of some server which loves to keep your data. What you type in the darkness will be brought to light and what you post in secret will shouted from the housetop. Here too I am assisted by this fact. I may not like that what I send or post is ultimately public. But in the end it makes me careful about what I say or type.
  3. Accountability has also been a help in my life. As a priest I think it is important to live a rather transparent life. I almost never just slip away from the rectory. I always tell someone on the staff where I am going, at least generally and when I expect to return. I am a public figure. Sure I have some privacy up in my rectory suite but over all I make it a rule to account for my whereabouts. I also usually wear my clerical attire as I go about (except on a day off). There are surely times when I expect the rectory to be a private home (after 9pm) but here too I live with three other priests and though we have our separate apartments, the communal quality of the rectory also provides a salutary kind of accountability in terms of personal behavior.

What I am ultimately saying is that too much demand for privacy can also be a problem. In the end the Lord intends for us to live in community where we are accountable to others. Some degree of accountability and transparency is helpful and necessary for us. It is clear that there are significant problems with the erosion of our privacy today. We ought to continue to insist that proper boundaries should be respected. However we should also remember that some demands for privacy are unrealistic. At some level we simply need to accept that the being online is the same as being in public with your name tag on. That’s just the way it is, so behave yourself. You might change your name on-line but guess what, it’s really those little numbers that identify you. Mine are: 76.1**.3*.6*5 (I have put asterisks as a form of non-disclosure there are acutal numbers in the place of them). Where-ever I go those little numbers say it’s me even if I lie about the fact that its me. Now we may lament this but I think it is better simply to say, when I am on-line I am in public with a name tag on. There is nothing private about Internet or e-mail or texting or anything else that uses the public airways, or communication lines. That’s just the way it is and knowing this can be salutary.

Finding the proper balance between our public and private lives can be difficult. Surely privacy is to be insisted upon in many cases. But it is also true that overly expansive  assumptions of privacy are neither possible nor always healthy. Being in public will always be a necessary part of our life and being aware when we are in public is important.  You are in public right now because you are on-line.

OK, as usual you all can help by making distinctions, giving examples, and delivering rebuttals.

Before you comment take a few minutes to watch this video. And never sell your copier again without insisting that you be able to destroy the hard drive. This report was a real eye-opener and will make me wary of how and when I copy confidential documents and personal information.


Watch CBS News Videos Online

Posted on

Growing Crisis: Over 40 Percent of Babies Are Born Outside of Marriage in the US

I want to discuss a very alarming new study that indicates that over 40% of children are born outside of marriage in this country. This situation is growing very serious and needs to be addressed in our parishes and homes. Here is a brief excerpt of the article:

The number of children born outside marriage in the United States has increased dramatically to four out of ten of all births. Figures show that 41 per cent of children born in 2008 did not have married parents – up from 28 per cent in 1990. Researchers have concluded that although Christian values still play an important role in American society, public attitudes have changed. Having a child out of wedlock does not carry the stigma and shame it once did, they say.

The study also found that in America there is a declining number of teenage mothers and rising numbers of older parents….

The U.S. research, taken from census reports and health statistics by the Pew Research Centre, also outlines a trend of couples in western societies marrying later in life and delaying parenthood until they can afford it.

The share of births to unmarried mothers had increased most among white and traditionally Catholic Hispanic women.

The article can be read here: 41% Of Children Born Outside of Marriage in US

The numbers are really quite striking and increase from 28% to 41% in just 18 years. Note that the article lays the matter clearly at our feet, fellow Catholics citing that we have shown the greatest increase in unmarried mothers.

As a Church we have to do a better job of addressing this very serious matter. It would seem that we should address it by re-emphasizing some of the following things:

  1. Fornication and cohabitation are serious sins – We need to teach and re-emphasize that fornication (pre-marital sex) and adultery are very serious sins. They are mortal sins and,  if one commits them and dies unrepentant,  they are excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven. This is not the opinion of some grouchy old priest or Victorian parents it is the clear and consistent testimony of Scripture both in the Old and New Testaments. I have written on the Biblical teaching here before and you can read it here: Sober, Serene and Scriptural about Sex. I have also posted a PDF document that summarizes the Biblical teaching about pre-marital sex here:  Biblical Teaching on Pre-Marital Sex. To be sure, some commit the sin of fornication in weakness but have recourse to confession and strive to master what is surely a strong passion. That is commendable. Yet to be so bold as to live together outside of marriage hardly demonstrates a contrition or a firm pupose of amendment. We must simply be clear  that it is boldly sinful to cohabitate.
  2. Fornication and cohabitation undermine marriage – We need to demonstrate that cohabitation and fornication undermine marriage.  Sex is a gift from God to the married to strengthen the love,  loyalty and marriage of man and women. Since they share a great blessing and pleasure together their bonds are strengthened and their union encouraged. From this shared love and pleasure their children come forth quite literally as a fruit of their love. But when fornication and cohabitation and other sexual misbehavior becomes widespread and acceptable in a culture, one of the great and unique benefits of marriage (sexual intimacy) that serves as a kind of glue and incentive for marriage is thus removed.  That this true is demonstrated by the sky-rocketing of rates of divorce and further cohabitation.
  3. Fornication and Cohabitation give scandal– Many people today think that giving scandal merely means to shock someone. But that is incorrect. To give scandal means to cause some one to fall by encouraging them or leading them to sin. One of the most scandalous aspects of fornication and  cohabitation is that they NO LONGER cause shock. This means that this bad behavior is now having deep effects by robbing people of their shock and shame. It is very wrong to contribute to something that might cause my brother or sister to fall. Giving bad example or contributing to the notion that there is nothing wrong with premarital sex helps to lead others to this behavior. In the end we will be held to account for causing scandal or contributing to it unless we repent.
  4. Fornication and Cohabitation are an injustice to children– Many who engage in pre-marital sex say they will contracept (a sin in itself)  and so no children will be affected. But that is simply not true. First, as already noted, promiscuity contributes to the overall undermining of marriage which surely harms children. But more specifically, the fact is  that high numbers of fornicators and cohabitors DO conceive and this leads to higher rates of abortion and also single motherhood. It is a blessing if a child not aborted but it remains true that children born out of wedlock are born into less than ideal conditions. God has set forth that the best environment to rear and raise children is stable, faithful, heterosexual marriage. A child is best raised by a father and mother who are consistently present and who give complimentary witness. A father contributes to development in a way a mother cannot. A mother contributes to development in a way that a father cannot. To engage in risky and sinful behavior that places children at greater risk of abortion or incomplete homes is an injustice. We don’t often think of sexual sins as sins of injustice but they are. In the end, it is the children who pay.

You will no doubt wish to add to the list or perhaps nuance what I have said. But in the end I think we have to be firm and clear about the wrongful nature of this sort of sexual misbehavior. I will say that the Church was not as clear as she should have been with me when I was growing up in the 1960s and 70s. But I can assure you the fallen angel who is the devil, and our fallen culture ARE clear as to what they think.

It is tragic to think that almost half of the Children born in this country are born into situations that are far from ideal. It is even more tragic that this does not have to be. Many think we really can’t turn this thing around. I disagree. The example of a concerted effort at eliminating smoking has had significant impact. If we come together and agree and are firm and clear I am sure we can make a difference. Even just taking the PDF document on Scriptural teaching I have produced above  and sharing it with you teenagers can help. But we need to do more and better. Things are at a critical stage just now.

For further data and research read here: Child Trends Data  (NB Though the report written in 2001 indicates out of wedlock births had leveled off, that assertion has been superceded by the more recent data which shows it has now again spiked).

This video depicts an important parental connection in helping young people develop a proper notion of sexuality and how it relates to marriage: